Posted by
Randal Lee Manning Jr. on Saturday, October 28, 2006 1:12:20 AM
Thomas Jefferson said "dissent is the highest form of patriotism." I know he said this because I see it pasted on the back of Volkswagen Rabbits and Chevy Nova's that carry liberals from one place to another. If Jefferson were alive today I would say to him, "Mr. Jefferson I respect you a great deal but I wholeheartedly disagree with you." Jesus Christ said, "greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13 NIV). If we allow for a definition of patriotism that states patriotism is the love for one's country and apply Jesus's principle to this then it would be fair to say that there is no higher form of patriotism than one who dies in service of his country. With this point two qualifications must be made. 1) I do not wish to assert that this would be Jesus Christ's teachings on the topic of patriotism because it most certainly wouldn't be, I merely wish to state a principle that Jesus asserted that is applicable to the topic at hand. 2) We must allow for a understanding that a country is not a form of government, a flag, a history but rather that a country is made up of sons and daughters, mothers and fathers and that each of the soldiers who fight, are fighting for the latter rather than the former. With these qualifications in mind then we can reasonably assert that the highest form of patriotism is when a man lays down his life for his country.
The above evaluation of definitions and forms of patriotism is necessary because the left and mainstream media is trying to recreate what a patriot is based on their above definition. I will contend with two examples that there is a force in society that no longer wants to elevate soldiers to the status of hero.
Recently I decided to go and watch the movie Flags of Our Fathers the new Clint Eastwood movie, recounting the Battle of Iwo Jima on the Japanese front of WWII. I was looking in the papers and noticed that it was the third best selling movie at the box offices. As I looked up the showtimes of the theaters around me I noticed that it was not playing at Meadows Stadium 12. That is right, a 12 screen theater was not playing the third best selling movie in the country. I am not sure as to why they decided not to air the movie however it seems more likely to me that the reason was a political and not a financial reason.
Flags of Our Fathers was also the movie that was criticized for not featuring any African American actors in it. This criticism is just silly. The movie has no need for any African American characters and it is probably more realistic because there aren't any. Not that African Americans didn't fight in WWII, but it is probable that no African American regiments were deployed to Iwo Jima. I would remind Hollywood that Clint Eastwood made the movie and Morgan Freeman is a central character in almost half of his movies. Furthermore one of the main characters is Native American so it is hardly whitewashed. The foolishness of this criticism leads me to believe that Hollywood and the mainstream press had an ulterior motive for criticizing this movie. (Oh and by the way remember the straw man fallacy referred to in my introduction. Like I said it can be used on a concept as well as a person and the left and Hollywood have employed one on this movie by implying that it is racist. Quickly ask yourself what this criticism says about the cinematic quality of the movie.)
In the final scene of the movie the son of the main character says, "it is hard for us to understand how so many men were willing to make such great sacrifices." As an American it is hard not to be touched by this story, and it is almost impossible not to feel a sense of national pride and a sense of responsibility to carry on the work of our forefathers that sacrificed so much for this country and world.
It is not surprising at all that Hollywood wants to shield the general public from this film. They do not like people thinking this way because it could influence the way we think about things now, especially in relation to the war in Iraq. So out of a necessity of pushing their agenda, war heroes and true patriots can no longer be viewed as such or it will threaten the left wing agenda.
It is now necessary for the left wing establishment to redefine and create The New Patriot. Who you ask is the new patriot. As this movement began in the 1960's we will start with a long time hero of the left but a villain of America. Daniel Ellsberg is the S.O.B who leaked the Pentagon Papers to the press who faithfully printed them. To the left he was courageous in subverting the Nixon administration to leak these top secret documents to the press. To me he should have undoubtedly been tried for treason and he possibly would have if his Father was not friends with J. Edgar Hoover. We fast forward to a contemporary figure who became a new patriot around the same time Ellsberg rose to fame.
John Kerry got back from Vietnam and joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War where he quickly dissented, and impugned the character of all the brothers he served with in the war in front of the American congress and on national television. He has cemented his status as a new patriot with recent comments such as, "our soldiers are terrorizing Iraqi women and children in the dark of night." Congratulations John you have successfully walked the line between full on treason and a champion of the left, which is a very thin line.
We now are in a new age of the new patriots. Such great patriots like Jack Murtha who has moved past dissent and gone to a position of presuming our troops our guilty before having all the relevant facts.
And finally the belle of the ball, Cindy Sheehan. Cindy, a lot of people were at first confused and thought that your son who died serving our country was the true patriot but now we see that your constant efforts at bringing shame to you and your sons name and actively trying to undermine the war effort is a much more courageous task. I don't think it will be long before Cindy Sheehan becomes the greatest patriot in the history of the left by blatantly committing treason. I would not at all be surprised if she went over to Iraq offering her body and her womb to the terrorist as a way of contributing to the cause of the insurgency, by bearing and giving birth to the future generations of terrorists.
The point of this article is to contrast traditional beliefs about what virtues should be valued and sought after by our society to what is currently being held up by the left. As we can see it is changing radically and quickly. We need to recognize the sacrifice that our forefathers made and that our young men and women are currently making. We need to recognize their actions as virtuous and heroic and defend against the people who wish to discredit or undermine what they have accomplished. We must also identify what patriotism is and what it is not, commending true patriots and condemning people who wish to define patriotism as the closest one can get to treason without technically committing the act.
Later this week... A defense of the soul